DOCSLIB.ORG

Adapting a Regulatory Framework for the Emerging Cannabis Industry

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Adapting a Regulatory Framework for the Emerging Cannabis Industry OCTOBER 2019 Learn more about NCIA’s Policy Council TheCannabisIndustry.org/PolicyCouncil National Cannabis Industry Association TheCannabisIndustry.org ADAPTING A REGULATORY FRAMEWORK FOR THE EMERGING CANNABIS INDUSTRY National Cannabis Industry Association (NCIA) Adapting a Proven Regulatory Framework for the Emerging Cannabis Industry Table of Contents 1 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 8 INTRODUCTION 11 LEGAL STATE OF CANNABIS IN THE UNITED STATES 13 CURRENT LEGISLATIVE EFFORTS 14 CANNABIS PRODUCTS 15 REMOVING THE OUTDATED REGULATORY STRUCTURE 16 ESTABLISHING A NEW REGULATORY FRAMEWORK 19 SOCIAL EQUITY 20 LANE #1: Pharmaceutical Drugs 23 LANE #2: Ingested, Inhaled, or Topically Applied THC Products 31 LANE #3: Ingested and Inhaled Cannabinoid Products with Low/No THC 40 LANE #4: Topically Applied Low THC Products 43 CONCLUSION National Cannabis Industry Association (NCIA) Adapting a Proven Regulatory Framework for the Emerging Cannabis Industry Executive Summary For almost a century, the United States government has criminalized the production, distribution, and sale of cannabis. However, this era of prohibition has been crumbling in the face of voter and, increasingly, legislative revolt. Even as these federal laws remain unchanged, most states have legalized some form of medical cannabis, and eleven states and the District of Columbia have changed their laws to regulate adult-use cannabis in a manner similar to alcohol. Moreover, Congress recently removed hemp (and any cannabinoids derived therefrom) from the Controlled Substances Act (CSA), legalizing a subset of cannabis plants and derivatives that contain less than 0.3% THC. With momentum building and public support ever-increasing, the critical question has shifted from “Should cannabis be legalized?” to “How will we regulate the commercial cannabis market at the federal level?” As the leading policy voice for the state-regulated cannabis industry, the National Cannabis Industry Association (NCIA) herein offers reasoned and responsible approaches that the federal government could adopt to regulate cannabis products after the last vestiges of federal prohibition are removed. The diversity of products that contain cannabis means that a “one-size-fits-all” regulatory framework would be ineffective. Under such a framework, some products would be overregulated, while others might be underregulated. Instead, different regulatory structures, or “lanes,” could be utilized based on the characteristics and intended uses of the products to leverage existing federal regulatory expertise. This will lead to an effective and efficient review process for existing government agencies that avoids unnecessary bureaucracy, costs, and delays for cannabis companies. Indeed, because human consumables are already regulated by the federal government through a variety of regulatory lanes designed for these purposes, most cannabis products could simply follow analogous products already being sold legally through these lanes. By 1 National Cannabis Industry Association (NCIA) Adapting a Proven Regulatory Framework for the Emerging Cannabis Industry building off existing systems and making modifications where necessary, all cannabis products could be properly regulated by existing federal agencies without reinventing the wheel. Currently, because of marijuana’s status as a Schedule I drug under the CSA, the Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA) is the primary federal regulator of cannabis, with criminal enforcement serving as the sole regulatory tool for the law enforcement agency. The first and most important step of a comprehensive regulatory system for cannabis would be for Congress to remove marijuana and its derivatives, including delta-9 tetrahydrocannabinol (THC), from the CSA, otherwise known as “descheduling.”1 Descheduling is the only way for cannabis to be regulated in the manner proposed herein, and it is the only way to truly reform federal cannabis policy in a sensible manner. Our proposal calls for cannabis products, like other highly regulated consumables, to be regulated by the government agencies that currently regulate most food and drugs, primarily the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) and the Alcohol and Tobacco Tax and Trade Bureau (TTB) within the U.S. Department of the Treasury. Under our plan, cannabis products would be divided into four categories, based on chemical components, safety, intended use, and consumption method. Each of these groups would be regulated through a separate regulatory “lane” tailored to the public policy issues raised by that particular classification. The four lanes are: (1) Pharmaceutical drugs; (2) Ingested, inhaled, or topically applied products with more than de minimis amounts of THC; (3) Ingested and inhaled products with de minimis amounts of THC; and (4) Topically applied products with de minimis amounts of THC. Lane #1 — Pharmaceutical drugs (e.g., Epidiolex; Marinol) (Regulated Like Prescription/OTC Drugs; Lead Federal Regulator: FDA) Lane #1 includes all products approved as pharmaceutical drugs, over which FDA currently exercises jurisdiction under the authority of the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act. This category currently includes approved drugs such as Epidiolex and Marinol and would include any cannabis derivative (whether extracted or synthetic) that is approved as 1 Some politicians advocate moving marijuana to a different/lower schedule (rescheduling within the CSA). However, rescheduling would limit most cannabis products to sales only through the current pharmaceutical drug system (Lane #1). 2 National Cannabis Industry Association (NCIA) Adapting a Proven Regulatory Framework for the Emerging Cannabis Industry Lane #1 — continued a new drug or authorized for use as an active pharmaceutical ingredient under a tentative or final over-the-counter (OTC) monograph. Products in Lane #1 are subject to FDA’s existing rigorous drug approval process. Once the products have been approved by FDA, substantiated disease claims could be made about them, consistent with the terms of the FDA’s approval and existing limitations governing off-label uses. These products would be sold alongside prescription or OTC drugs, depending on whether they are approved for use by prescription or OTC. Necessary Legislation: Lane #1 requires no legislative modifications, other than “descheduling” cannabis to facilitate further drug research and vest FDA with sole regulatory authority. Lane #2 — Ingested, inhaled, or topically applied products with more than de minimis amounts of THC (+0.3%) (Regulated Like Alcohol; Lead Federal Regulator: TTB) Lane #2 includes edible, inhalable, and topically applied cannabis products that are not approved as pharmaceutical drugs by FDA under Lane #1 but that contain more than a de minimis amount of THC (greater than 0.3% by dry weight). The intoxicating properties of these cannabis products raise public policy and safety concerns that are not present for the low- THC products in Lanes #3 and #4. Accordingly, these products would be sold through a network of state-licensed retail stores to individuals meeting state age requirements and/or qualifying medical condition requirements, as appropriate. Here, the states would assume the primary regulatory responsibility for these products, with TTB playing a significant oversight role at the federal level. Of course, thirty-three states already have regulations in place for the sale of medical marijuana through state- licensed dispensaries, and eleven states have legalized recreational sales through state-licensed retail facilities. 3 National Cannabis Industry Association (NCIA) Adapting a Proven Regulatory Framework for the Emerging Cannabis Industry Lane #2 — continued Necessary Legislation: Congressional action would be needed to deschedule marijuana and THC (above 0.3%). Legislation would also be needed to grant authority to TTB to regulate these substances (similar to the regulation of alcohol) and to facilitate interstate shipment of the products, as the 2018 Farm Bill did for hemp. Consistent with the model for alcohol, FDA and the states would retain important regulatory roles. Congressional action would be needed to authorize FDA to establish manufacturing requirements for inhalable products. Most cannabis products currently being sold through state adult-use or medical cannabis programs would be regulated through this lane. Lane #3 — Ingested and inhaled products with de minimis amounts of THC (<0.3% THC) (e.g., CBD, CBN, and CBG) (Regulated Like Food/Dietary Supplements; Lead Regulator: FDA) Lanes #3 and #4 are the least restrictive lanes and cover products containing no more than de minimis amounts of THC. Currently, federal law provides for the inclusion only of hemp and hemp derivatives with a THC concentration below 0.3%. Numerous non-intoxicating cannabinoids such as CBD, CBN, THC-A, and THC-V may be derived from either the marijuana plant or the hemp plant. The 2018 Farm Bill created an arbitrary dividing line between marijuana and hemp plants, based entirely on their THC concentration. This has resulted in an overregulation of popular non-intoxicating products based on the THC level of the plant source material instead of the THC level of the finished product (e.g., CBD derived from the marijuana plant). We propose remedying this problem by classifying any final product containing less than 0.3% THC within Lane #3, rather than focusing on the THC content of the plant source material or of any intermediate product. Based on existing research, these low-THC products
Load more

Recommended publications
  • The Highs and Lows of Startups in the Cannabis Industry: a Pestle Analysis of the Current Issues
    THE HIGHS AND LOWS OF STARTUPS IN THE CANNABIS INDUSTRY: A PESTLE ANALYSIS OF THE CURRENT ISSUES Jeffrey E. Anderson California State University, Los Angeles Mine Üçok Hughes California State University, Los Angeles Carlin Nguyen California State University, Los Angeles SUMMARY: With recreational cannabis now legal in ten US states, illegal cannabis growing operations are increasingly being replaced with regulated, taxed, and licensed businesses. Sales are predicted to increase roughly 35% from 2017, to more than $8 billion by the end of 2018, and to $22 billion by 2022. Projections like these have contributed to a startup boom in the cannabis industry unseen since the tech boom of the late 1990s. The aim of this paper is to highlight the unique issues faced by startups in the cannabis industry. We examine the elements that influence the cannabis startups by using the PESTLE framework which includes political, economic, social, technological, legal and ecological factors. We identify three types of cannabis startups and provide a brief analysis of differences between them as well as the challenges that they all face. Introduction With recreational use of cannabis currently legalized in ten US states, illegal cannabis growing operations are steadily being supplanted with regulated, taxed, and licensed businesses. Companies operating in these states are now able to legally produce and sell marijuana in their respective states. The 2018 Marijuana Business Factbook predicts sales to increase roughly 35% from 2017, to more than $8 billion by the end of the year (Marijuana Business Daily, 2018). By 2022, sales in the United States are projected to increase by 250%, to $22 billion.
    [Show full text]
  • The Green Regulatory Arbitrage
    Table of Contents I. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ...................................................................................................... 1 II. PROHIBITION - HOW CANNABIS BECAME ILLEGAL ..................................................... 4 III. THE LEGAL LANDSCAPE .................................................................................................... 7 A. Federal Law And Its Impact On The Cannabis Industry ..................................................... 7 1. Cannabis Is A Schedule 1 Substance ............................................................................ 7 2. Access To Capital Markets Restricted ......................................................................... 9 3. Banking Services Limited .......................................................................................... 10 4. Tax Burdens .............................................................................................................. 11 5. Interstate And International Commerce Restrictions ................................................. 11 6. Insurance Options Limited ........................................................................................ 12 7. Medical Research And Clinical Trials Stymied .......................................................... 12 8. Professional Services Harder To Find ........................................................................ 13 9. Real Estate Challenges .............................................................................................. 13 B. The States
    [Show full text]
  • Nurturing New Growth Canada Gets Ready for Cannabis 2.0 Table of Contents
    Nurturing new growth Canada gets ready for Cannabis 2.0 Table of contents Introduction 1 Cannabis 2.0: Canadian survey insights 4 Perspectives on Cannabis 2.0 22 The way forward: Thriving in a Cannabis 2.0 world 30 Remain bold 32 Nurturing new growth | Canada gets ready for Cannabis 2.0 | Introduction Introduction ll eyes remain on Canada as it prepares for the next stage of cannabis legalization—a step that will keep A the country firmly at the vanguard of a societal revolution and a new industry exploding with potential. “Cannabis 2.0” will see edibles containing cannabis and cannabis concentrates become legal on October 17, 2019. Their legalization will mean seven classes of cannabis products will be approved for sale in Canada, as dried cannabis, cannabis oil, fresh cannabis, cannabis plants, cannabis plant seeds, were legalized in 2018. The speed with which Canada’s cannabis industry has evolved over the past 18 months has been truly remarkable. In this, our third annual report on Canada’s cannabis industry, Deloitte has taken a broader approach in our research. As in previous years, we conducted comprehensive market research to understand Canadian consumer sentiment on cannabis edibles and other alternative products coming with Cannabis 2.0 legalization. The introduction of these new products is creating new opportunities in product mixes, reaching new cannabis consumers not fully comfortable with traditional consumption methods currently available. 1 Nurturing new growth | Canada gets ready for Cannabis 2.0 | Introduction As well, we explore trends and Our research suggests that the new However, we do need to acknowledge issues affecting the cannabis sector, alternative cannabis products becoming that Canada’s legal recreational drawing on extensive interviews and legal in late 2019 will be a significant cannabis industry is still in its infancy.
    [Show full text]
  • Unconstitutional Qualification of the Right to Bear Arms by the Federal Government Against Law-Abiding Medical Marijuana Patients
    A STICKY SITUATION: THE UNCONSTITUTIONAL QUALIFICATION OF THE RIGHT TO BEAR ARMS BY THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT AGAINST LAW-ABIDING MEDICAL MARIJUANA PATIENTS LUKE C. WATERS* INTRODUCTION ......................................................................................... 116 I. MEDICAL MARIJUANA LAWS ................................................................ 120 A. Comprehensive Medical Marijuana Programs ....................... 121 B. Federal Laws & Policies ........................................................ 129 1. The Ogden Memo ............................................................. 134 2. The Cole Memo ................................................................ 135 3. The Cole Recreational Memo ........................................... 137 4. The Sessions Enforcement Memo .................................... 137 5. The Rohrabacher-Farr Amendment .................................. 138 II. SECOND AMENDMENT RIGHTS ............................................................ 142 A. An Awkward Landmark Decision ......................................... 143 B. The Post-Heller Two-Step Qualification Analysis ................ 144 1. Individuals Adjudicated as Mentally-Ill ........................... 149 2. Users of Illegal Drugs ....................................................... 151 IV. UNCONSTITUTIONAL APPLICATION ................................................... 152 A. Modest Collateral Burdens: Wilson v. Lynch ......................... 153 B. Applying the Two-Step Test to Qualified Patients Appropriately
    [Show full text]
  • Economic Impact of Cannabis in San Diego County
    Economic Impact of Cannabis in San Diego County 2021 California State University San Marcos Cannabis Points of Contact: (CSUSM) Virginia Casey, Blue Water Government Office of Business Research and Analysis Affairs, Communications Director (OBRA) Dallin Young, Blue Water Government Affairs, 333 S. Twin Oaks Valley Road President San Marcos, CA 92096 www.csusm.edu/coba Research Team Leads: Johnny Martinez Cannabis Organization: Sofia Rodriguez Dallin Young President Research Team Members: Blue Water Government Affairs Amanda Boudreault Samantha Hoover Publishers: Riley McLaughlin Miguel de Jesus, CSUSM Liz Yocom Roger Herzler, CSUSM Judith Opdahl, CSUSM Layout: Amanda Boudreault Administrative Support Sofia Rodriguez Giselle Bazan For questions about this report, contact: Miguel de Jesus [email protected] (760) 750 - 4266 Executive Summary The cannabis industry has gone through many series of events that has brought it to the billion dollar industry it is today. Since its move from the illicit market, to the legalization of medicinal cannabis in 1996, and continued positive shifts of perceptions of cannabis, there has been exponential growth in the industry. The Office of Business Research and Analysis (OBRA) has analyzed the general impact of the cannabis industry in San Diego County. Throughout this research, OBRA sought to find how adult-use and medicinal cannabis sales increases in revenue and influences the community regarding finances, police enforcement, cannabis license types, public health, and social equity. The cannabis industry yields a considerable amount of revenue to municipalities from cannabis city taxes. Data from public records requests from the cities of San Diego, La Mesa, and Vista illustrate the amount of money by quarter that each city has brought in since their legalization of medicinal cannabis and or adult-use cannabis.
    [Show full text]
  • Rethinking Federal Marijuana Policy by Ed Chung, Maritza Perez, and Lea Hunter May 1, 2018
    Rethinking Federal Marijuana Policy By Ed Chung, Maritza Perez, and Lea Hunter May 1, 2018 For decades, the failed war on drugs has devastated communities across the United States, contributing to unprecedented rates of incarceration. The United States has nearly 25 percent of the world’s incarcerated population despite comprising less than 5 percent of the world’s total population.1 This phenomenon gained momentum in the 1970s when President Richard Nixon first declared a war on drugs and policy- makers at all levels of government added harsh criminal penalties for drug offenses, leading to explosive incarceration rates. Since then, the nation’s incarcerated popula- tion has increased sevenfold—from 300,000 people to 2.2 million people today—and 1 out of 5 people incarcerated are serving time for a drug offense.2 People of color have disproportionately felt the damaging and unnecessary consequences of these outdated tough-on-crime policies. Members of these communities have been sentenced to long terms of imprisonment as well as lifetimes of poverty and economic insecurity.3 According to the Drug Policy Alliance, drug enforcement in the United States is rooted in racial discrimination, as the first anti-drug laws were established around the turn of the 20th century and targeted Chinese immigrants, black Americans, and Mexican migrants.4 Today, between 40 percent and 50 percent of all drug arrests are for mari- juana.5 Discriminatory enforcement of marijuana laws is one reason that black and Latino Americans make up two-thirds of the U.S. prison population despite only comprising 12 percent and 17 percent of the U.S.
    [Show full text]
  • A Multifaceted Approach to Address Variation in Cannabis Sativa
    University of Northern Colorado Scholarship & Creative Works @ Digital UNC Dissertations Student Research 5-2019 A Multifaceted Approach to Address Variation in Cannabis Sativa Anna Louise Schwabe Follow this and additional works at: https://digscholarship.unco.edu/dissertations Recommended Citation Schwabe, Anna Louise, "A Multifaceted Approach to Address Variation in Cannabis Sativa" (2019). Dissertations. 554. https://digscholarship.unco.edu/dissertations/554 This Text is brought to you for free and open access by the Student Research at Scholarship & Creative Works @ Digital UNC. It has been accepted for inclusion in Dissertations by an authorized administrator of Scholarship & Creative Works @ Digital UNC. For more information, please contact [email protected]. © 2019 ANNA LOUISE SCHWABE ALL RIGHTS RESERVED UNIVERSITY OF NORTHERN COLORADO Greeley, Colorado The Graduate School A MULTIFACETED APPROACH TO ADDRESS VARIATION IN CANNABIS SATIVA A Dissertation Submitted in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree of Doctor of Philosophy Anna Louise Schwabe College of Natural and Health Sciences School of Biological Sciences Biological Education May 2019 This Dissertation by: Anna Louise Schwabe Entitled: A Multifaceted Approach to Address Variation in Cannabis sativa has been approved as meeting the requirement for the Degree of Doctor of Philosophy in College of Natural and Health Sciences in School of Biological Sciences, Program of Biological Education. Accepted by the Doctoral Committee ____________________________________________________
    [Show full text]
  • Cannabis Industry and Edibles
    CANNABIS INDUSTRY AND EDIBLES LABOUR MARKET REPORT ABOUT US Food Processing Skills Canada (FPSC) is the food and beverage manufacturing industry’s workforce development organization. As a non-profit, located in Ottawa with representatives across Canada, we support food and beverage manufacturing businesses from coast to coast in developing skilled and professional employees and workplace environments. Our work directly and positively impacts industry talent attraction, workforce retention and employment culture. We care about assisting the industry in finding, training and retaining the very best people for the job. Through our partnerships with industry, associations, educators and all levels of This project was funded by the Government of Canada’s Sectoral Initiatives Program. governments in Canada, FPSC has developed exceptional resources for The opinions and interpretations in this publication are those of the author and do not the sector including the Food Skills Library™, Canadian Food Processors necessarily reflect those of the Government of Canada. Institute™, FoodCert™ and Labour Market Information Reports. ISBN 978-1-989541-56-2 Copyright © 2020 Food Processing Skills Canada All rights reserved. The use of any part of this publication, whether it is reproduced, stored in a retrieval system or transmitted in any form or by any means (including electronic, mechanical, photographic, photocopying or recording), without the prior written permission of the Food Processing Skills Canada is an infringement of copyright law. Food Processing
    [Show full text]
  • Marijuana Legalization Has Gained Traction in Recent Years in the United
    How One 11-Page Bill Could Yield Billions in Annual Benefits: The Marijuana Justice Act of 2017 Haley Dunn arijuana legalization has gained traction in recent years in the United States with a variety of bipartisan supporters. Primary benefits often cited include savings in enforcement and incarceration costs, additional tax revenue and jobs, release and expungement for those incarcerated, Mand lowered racial and economic disproportionality in the U.S. criminal justice system. Critics often bring up health costs, increases in impaired driving, harmful effects on adolescent brain development, and greater attendant crime as possible drawbacks. This article examines the potential costs and benefits of federal marijuana legalization under the Senate version of the Marijuana Justice Act of 2017 (S. 1689) introduced in the 115th Congress, assuming 30 additional states legalize recreational marijuana and set up a regulated commercial retail system. Using an analysis that operates under a net present value over 1,000 years and reflects 2017 dollar amounts, the results are overwhelming: these combined efforts could lead to nationwide lifetime net benefits of over $168 billion, with approximately $50 billion in the first year alone, and $17 billion in tax revenue that federal and state governments could receive annually. This article also runs best- and worst-case scenario sensitivity analyses in a post- enactment universe—best being one in which all 50 states legalize recreational marijuana and worst being one in which no additional states legalize. Even the worst- case scenario would lead to lifetime net benefits of over $77 billion ($4 billion/year) and, in the best case, over $1.4 trillion ($75 billion/year).
    [Show full text]
  • A Baseline Review and Assessment of the Massachusetts Adult-Use Cannabis Industry: Market Data and Industry Participation
    A Baseline Review and Assessment of the Massachusetts Adult-Use Cannabis Industry: Market Data and Industry Participation February 2020 Massachusetts Cannabis Control Commission: Steven J. Hoffman, Chairman Kay Doyle, Commissioner Jennifer Flanagan, Commissioner Britte McBride, Commissioner Shaleen Title, Commissioner Shawn Collins, Executive Director Prepared by the Massachusetts Cannabis Control Commission Research and Information Technology Departments: Samantha M. Doonan, BA, Research Analyst David McKenna, PhD, Chief Technology Officer Julie K. Johnson, PhD, Director of Research Acknowledgements External Collaborators Alexandra F. Kritikos, MA, Brandeis University Cannabis Control Commission Communications Cedric Sinclair, Director of Communications Maryalice Gill, Press Secretary Kirsten Swenson, Communications Specialist Management Alisa Stack, Chief Operating Officer Erika Scibelli, Chief of Staff Legal Christine Baily, General Counsel Allie DeAngelis, Associate General Counsel Enforcement and Licensing Yaw Gyebi, Chief of Enforcement Paul Payer, Enforcement Counsel Kyle Potvin, Director of Licensing Patrick Beyea, Director of Investigations Derek Chamberlin, Licensing Analyst Anne DiMare, Licensing Specialist Government Affairs David Lakeman, Director of Government Affairs 2 Suggested bibliographic reference format: Doonan SM., McKenna, D., Johnson JK., (2020, February). A Baseline Review and Assessment of the Massachusetts Adult-Use Cannabis Industry— A Report to the Massachusetts Legislature. Boston, MA: Massachusetts Cannabis
    [Show full text]
  • New Years Resolutions for the Canadian Cannabis Industry
    December 15, 2020 New Years Resolutions for the Canadian Cannabis Industry There was a lot of economic optimism and 3. Keep telling the economic story to those excitement when Canada became the first who need to hear it. The industry has led large, developed country in the world to legalize to the creation of thousands of new jobs, recreational cannabis for adult use in 2018. While hundreds of millions in infrastructure this new industry and governments alike have investment, reinvigorated retail areas and accomplished an incredible amount in the two spurred new innovative technologies, years since, it was anything but smooth sailing for processes and products. Yet, this story is cannabis businesses even before the COVID-19 not well known by Canadians and pandemic added even more challenges. So as governments have been largely reluctant 2020 (finally) comes to a close, here are some to acknowledge the economic impacts New Years resolutions for the industry looking of the industry. The economic footprint of ahead to 2021. cannabis in Canada is continuing increase and the industry must find new ways of sharing this good news. 1. Move on from 2020. Despite being mostly excluded from government loan 4. Keep investing energy in educating programs, producers can be proud of governments and advocating for sensible keeping their doors open and employees policy changes. In a new, highly safe during the pandemic. In the face of regulated, and stigmatized sector, all uncertainty over provincial essential orders of government have been service designations, retailers fought cautious and reluctant in their approach strongly for the ability to offer curbside to cannabis policies.
    [Show full text]
  • Effective Public Management
    Effective Public Management June 2016 Bootleggers, Baptists, bureaucrats, and bongs: How special interests will shape marijuana legalization By Philip Wallach and Jonathan Rauch INTRODUCTION AND SUMMARY ast November, the campaign for a state constitutional amendment in Ohio provided a glimpse of one possible future of marijuana legalization. Four other states and the District of Columbia Lhad already passed legalization initiatives, but Ohio’s was different. Its terms would have restricted marijuana production to ten sites—all of which were in the hands of the initiative’s financial backers, who had put up more than $20 million to pass the initiative. Voters and even many legalization advocates, offended by the nakedly self-serving terms of the proposal, rejected it, but the effort amounted to a wake-up call. Where there are markets, regula- tions, and money, special interests and self-serving behavior will not be far away. However desirable Philip Wallach is a senior fellow in technocratic regulation might (or might not) seem in principle, interest-group politics and bureaucratic Governance Studies at priorities will shape the way marijuana is legalized and regulated—probably increasingly over time. the Brookings Institution. In and of itself, that fact is neither good nor bad; it is inevitable. But it calls for some careful thinking about how interest-group politics and the search for economic rents (as economists call protections favoring certain market participants over others) may inflect or infect one of the most important and challenging policy reforms of the modern era. Why did legalization of marijuana break through in the face of what had long been overwhelming interest-group resistance? In a post-disruption world, how might the key social and bureaucratic Jonathan Rauch is actors reorganize and reassert themselves? As legalization ushers in a “new normal” of marijuana- a senior fellow in related regulation and lobbying, what kinds of pitfalls and opportunities lie ahead? In this paper, we Governance Studies at the Brookings Institution.
    [Show full text]